Chimera Kennels

I would love to hear everyones thoughts regarding the different biting techniques, mainly the bite and hold vs the bite/release then re-bite?

What have you witnessed, personally felt or think is the best method for keeping assailants away from you and your loved ones?

Although I have NO PROBLEMS with a dog that counters with a rebite to get a better hold (either a deeper bite or a better bite location), I do NOT like a dog that is mouthy on the bite in a "typewriter" fashion that is searching for a successful grip. I personally prefer a dog that typically only rebites to counter or to get a fuller grip.

lee didn't you say a dog who mouths like that is a cur?  Maybe it was someone else

A dog that mouths like a typewritter typically does not want to be there, and IMO has confidence issues.

If your main purpose is to keep assailants away and your dog engages in a bite in most cases I believe an assailant will be wanting to retreat not actually be trying to fight your dog like most demo's seem to indicate. If your dog bites then releases and the assailant runs away there is no need of a re bite and your dog was successful you are out of danger and he did his job. Now if he insists on his mission then your dog should re bite with more intent, your dog should be able read and asses the needed amount of force to neutralize the situation. If your dog bites and holds and the assailant is attempting to run away but cant because of the held bite is this defeating the purpose of trying to drive away an assailant. Its not the technique but the intent of the dog if your dog has no real intent but knows how to hang on a bite from good sleeve work does that make you safer, not saying that won't be enough in most cases. Kind of like should you fire a warning shot or empty your gun into the guy its a matter of intent his and yours and assessment of the amount of force needed which a real dog does naturally. Some good pit dogs weren't known to have a good bite or "hard mouth" but they were still champs and got the job done. If in training your dog is conditioned to always get his good long bite and feel superior, yet when faced with a skilled enemy is unable to get his good bite will this cause him to be intimidated or will he still get the job done. Just the intent of the bite regardless of technique should be enough in most cases IMO. My dog instinctively goes for the face and neck, in this case a long hold isn't needed because the intent would be apparent to any assailant. Now with regard to a weapon I believe this is were technique comes into play since weapons aren't a natural acurance and a dog should respond to them as an increased threat level and be able to hold or disable the weapon arm if needed.

Personally, I don't think I would fire a warning shot. My reason for not doing so is I wouldn't pull my gun until it was needed. I don't believe in waving a gun or firing unnecessarily. That said, I also don't think I would shoot just one time. Should an attack be in my home, I would AT LEAST double tap. Once I pull a gun and decide to shoot, it will be with the intent to stop the attack. If it was that serious, well...if he lives or not will be his responsibility...as I wouldn't fire unless the threat was real.

Back to dogs. Now, what is mention by Mike V (in my opinion) is fine from an untrained dog that has not yet learned how to bite if due to a dog's inhibition to bite due to being raised by people. Key word though here is inhibition. A dog that bites to let someone escape is doing so because it isn't comfortable on the bite. Once a dog is trained, it should be confident and comfortable on the bite. If you want an attacker to be able to leave, simply teach the dog to out on command by its handler. If that is done, the attacker can still leave when the HANDLER decides the threat is stopped and he can also warn the attacker to "DON'T MOVE" (to freeze and wait for the cops).

Bottom line though is all this stuff is hypothetical conversation.

What is not hypothetical is why the dog does what it does. If we ask why a dog releases the biite, it is because the drive to bite has been deminished. Now, we have to ask what caused the drive to deminish. Was the dog's insecurity the problem? Did the dog lack drive? Did the dog have some bite inhibition issue? Was the dog turned off by its handler? Will the dog not stay on a passive bite?

 Before we think it is good for a dog to release a passive man, we need to remember a passive person could still be armed with a gun or some other weapon or get access to a weapon if the dog releases him. Do you really want your dog deciding when to let go? I don't. I want my dog to only bite in 1 of 4 situations...

1. In training

2. I am not home and someone breaks in (criminal decided to take the risk of getting bit and therefore should be bit).

3. After I perceive a threat (passive or active), I choose to send the dog to bite.

4. I am unable to give a command (maybe knocked out from behind) and the dog's natural response (drives and loyalty-pack instinct) kick in to protect me or my family.

I can not think of any other situation (at this time) that I would allow my dog to bite; however, it is possible that I may be overlooking another possible situation that I would allow a dog to bite. HOWEVER, I certainly do know how to recognize a justifiable bite and an unjustifiable bite. I will not permit or tollerate a dog making unjustifiable bites. So, should a dog show aggression within the family or to children or something...I have no use for those types of dogs. Therefore, I don't want "warning bites" anymore than I want warning shots. A dog that chooses to "warn" is generally because they want to AVOID conflict...it is an avoidance behavior.

Ask ourselves, why do dogs growls, shows teeth, stands with hackles up and other "posturing" types of warning behavior is typical of dogs that lack confidence. The best dogs don't just work in suspicion and defense, but are balanced with prey and fight drive...which are forward behaviors that lack warnings. Prey drive is to hunt. You don't warn prey. Fight drive is to eliminate, you don't warn once you get so driven that you want to eliminate your opponent. Defense is good, but that alone is not enough as a defensive only dog will typically lack confidence in battle and can be pushed into avoidance. The goal for most good programs is to obtain a good balance of prey or fight and to combine it with just enough defense and suspision to keep a dog attentive, but not concerned or insecure.

I personally like confident fight drive the most...as I find such types of dogs the most willing to keep an attacker busy regardless of the intensity of pressure. The harder they are pushed, the harder they push back.

A dog will release its bite to let someone leave when the drives are turned down or off. For this reason, a dog that starts typewritting does "bite release, bite release, bite release, repeat again and again until the attacker stops beating me" as a nervous/fearful behavior because the dog really doesn't want to be there and is uncomfortable on the bite. When a dog does that, it lacks in confidence and drive. Which is not something I want. I prefer a dog that has enough drive and confidence to stay in hold no matter what...except for only 1 of 2 situations...

1. so the bite can get a better hold elsewhere within a millisecond (so fast that the dog is not thinking of releasing, but actually thinking of biting and therefore still in drive), or

2. because I told him to release.

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I'm of the opinion that if someone is worth shooting they're worth killing. If I think someone is a big enough threat to me and my family for me to draw a gun, I'm not going to be firing warning shots. That said a dog who bites then re-bites when he gets access to a better area is much more likely to kill someone by puncturing something vital. A dog who bites and holds on the arm or leg is mostly going to catch, of course a dog who holds on the neck is very likely to kill. My preference is a dog who catches, leaving the choice of whether lethal force is needed up to the handler. I don't like the idea of a dog that lets the attacker get away either, I'd rather see him in jail than free to hurt other people. I also believe a dog should be trained to target the weapon arm. I've heard people say the dog might bite a gun and hurt his teeth, and no one would be able to think about shooting the dog on his other arm because of the pain. To me that's betting a lot on a generalization, they might start shooting wild and shoot any number of people, or keep their focus and shoot the dog right off their arm. IMO the best thing a dog can offer you while holding an attacker with a gun is a clear shot for you and your gun.

"Bottom line though is all this stuff is hypothetical conversation."

True words of wisdom!!!

Loved hearing everyones input on the subject.

I am one who believes that a solid bite followed by a retarget/rebite is advantageous to a bite and hold.

My reasoning is that if more than one criminal is present then it allows the dog to multiple target without becoming a near stationary target for the other criminals to strike,stab,shoot, etc.

As far as a gun goes, I do not believe in warning shots, when you draw a gun it is meant for one purpose and that is to shoot and hit your intended target.  Double tap, reaquire your next target, point double tap and continue until the threats are no longer a danger to your safety.

I believe a capable dog should be capable of both techniques when needed, a capable dogs instincts are far superior then its human partner and should be able to adapt to the situation and know which techniques to use for that specific situation and read and counter as needed as any true skilled fighter does.

"'""As far as a gun goes, I do not believe in warning shots, when you draw a gun it is meant for one purpose and that is to shoot and hit your intended target. Double tap, reacquire your next target, point double tap and continue until the threats are no longer a danger to your safety. """"

I have to disagree because what constitutes a threat to your safety this is extremely subjective. Yes three armed shit bags looking to do you harm is a situation where I say draw and tap away until they all fall down. Three entering into your home, drop them and ask questions later.

But say you are carrying, no dog involved and are confronted by three unarmed punks just looking to start some  trouble, yes a potential danger but one that is easily neutralized just by the site of a gun without the actual use of it. When the cops show up to find three unarmed punks spread out was your shooting spree justified and is the jury going to be on your side when it was just a group of high school punks with no prior criminal activity just out trying to act bad ass.

You see a guy approaching you holding a tire iron, its dark you pull and shoot. Then when the cop gets there they find his wife and kid back at the car because he was just looking for some help in changing his tire, but you didn't know but you precieved a threat and neutralized it.

My point is all scenarios have levels of danger and the force applied in defending yourself should be adequate for the situation, every situation is not the extreme doomsday vision that may be playing in ones imagination. In most cases just the site of the dog or gun will neutralize a potential threat before your even aware there was one. Both provide security, mainly peace of mind, and the actual use of either in a conflict is highly unlikely. So when the three unarmed punks approach do you shoot first or don't draw and maybe get your ass beat or pull it out and watch their quick retreat. I say pull it out then precede as the situation dictates, fire a shot if needed to prove further intent, but obviously this situation doesn't require three double tapped dead bodies laying on the ground in order to be nutralized.

Every situation is unique and requires split second evaluation and action to ensure your safety.

Escalation of an already bad situation is never ideal.

Everything we think we know, may not serve any purpose at all in an unknown altercation, chaos reigns!

I do agree that an ideal dog should be able to switch between bite/hold/re-target as necessary but very few train their dogs for scenarios of multiple weaponed attackers.  It is difficult to find quality trainers/decoys willing to take the abuse of hidden sleeves and muzzle work.

All any of us can do is train our dogs and ourselves based on realistic situations, practice situational awareness and take preventive action when necessary to ensure our safety hoping for the best outcome in the event we find ourselves in an unavoidable altercation.